Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

Alright, the more I look at the 2014 Flash tv series costume, the more I see that its wrong. I mean really wrong.

I stand by my previous statement regarding this costume -- that this is just a replica of the Daredevil movie costume with a lightning symbol on it instead of the Double-D. I mean absolutely. Look at it.

The people behind this are clearly infatuated with things that are dark. I mean in broad daylight his costume looks MAROON, while in the darkness of the night it looks virtually BLACK. There is absolutely nothing vibrant or energetic looking about this costume. It looks dark and depressed instead.

But then the people behind this costume design might come up with lame excuses like "Hey look, his costume was meant to be tactical."
The FLASH doesn't need to be tactical like Batman. His lightning speed overpowers any need to be tactical. He doesn't need to sneak up on enemies. He can run at speeds no enemy eyes can cope.

Just let the people behind this land Batman projects instead in the future. I think their "dark" appetite are better suited for the Dark Knight.

The DC Cinematic Universe

Last week was about the fifth time I've heard that there is a mandate at Warner Bros. regarding any of the DC superhero films in development, and it's very simple and direct and to the point.

"No jokes."

It would seem like a crazy rule to set for an entire series of films. How can you know what the tone is for every story you'll be telling in a series before you've even started telling it? The thing is, DC has taken a few stabs at establishing this larger universe on film, and they've gotten smacked down for everything that hasn't had Batman in it. "Man Of Steel" made money, and I'm certainly not the only person to like the film. I may be one of its more ardent defenders, but I'm not alone. I think you'd have a far harder time finding someone to defend "Green Lantern," the studio's other big attempt at launching one of the core Justice League characters with a film franchise of his own.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

^
The Flash and Wonder Woman would be their best bet when it comes to humor.

The Flash is just very fast, so he can get "jittery" at times. And those could make really funny scenes.
INSERT jokes in scenes where he gets jittery. Don't overuse jokes, just use the right amount at the right moments.

Wonder Woman is not from earth. So she's ignorant about many things on earth. And those could make up some really funny scenes. Actually Marvel applied that strategy with the humor in the Thor movie. So it's a tested method. Something similar can be done with WW.

And finally, give Flash a solo movie. He runs so fast he can fly in the box office!

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

The actress seemed pleased to hear that anyone was getting the chance to don the tiara and lasso on film, but with the suit revealed, Access Hollywood asked for her initial reaction to Diana’s new duds:

“Well, I was missing the red, white and blue, I have to say… I don’t know. I haven’t seen it yet, so I really can’t comment. Maybe there’s a lot more color in it than what we saw in the picture.”

Eager to point out the more important issue, Carter went on to explain that Gadot and her colleagues have bigger challenges than what message is sent by their character’s costume:

“It’s almost impossible to play a superhero anyway. You can’t. You just have to play a character that happens to do these amazing things. That’s the only way you can do it. And the costumes all take care of themselves.”

“I’ll have to wait and see. I hate to comment on something that I haven’t seen and I’m very supportive of Gal Gadot. I’m very supportive of them doing Wonder Woman, putting her in any capacity. I think she needs to be out there. … It’s high time somebody took a chance and did it and so I’m really happy about that.”

Re: New Line’s ‘Shazam’

Good news. It's such a relief to know that he's playing Black Adam. He's a good actor but I cannot imagine him playing Shazam. The looks just don't fit. Some people are meant to play the opposite. Just like the guy who played Loki -- he actually first auditioned to play Thor. But the people who decides said "Look, you're Loki not Thor."
Now Black Adam is just a perfect fit for Dwayne. He did an amazing job as the Scorpion King in the Mummy Returns. And I'm sure he will pull off an amazing job as Black Adam. I can imagine it already.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

Hewing closely to the template of “Smallville,” “The Flash” bursts out of the starting gate, racing through an origin story and related history that transforms baby-faced CSI Barry Allen into the red-streaked superhero. Like all pilots in the genre, the only reason to keep one foot on the brake, enthusiasm-wise, is whether the producers can sustain a high level of special effects and action once a weekly episodic schedule (and budget) kicks in. CW already has found a steadying presence in “Arrow,” and this more comicbook-y entry could be another solid anchor from sibling DC Comics.

Purists can wince, with some justification, at the casting of Grant Gustin as Barry; last seen high-stepping on “Glee,” the thesp gives the character a look that’s more suited to studying for midterms than investigating crimes. Still, the pandering to younger demos hardly stops there (witness the upcoming “Fantastic Four” reboot), so the offended can either buy into the choice or wait 25 years for another Flash series to come along.

Yep, it’s been that long since CBS took a “Batman”-inspired run at the character, and that series — while in some respects ahead of its time — quickly fizzled.

And Suicide Squad is supposed to be a bigger name than say Flash or Aquaman???

What are they doing?? We all know Batman vs Superman is gonna be huge. They should capitalize on that and do more of the big hero movies in succession. They can do Suicide Squad later. There's no hurry for that.

I mean, look, Marvel didn't do Guardians of the Galaxy right after Iron Man 1 or Thor 1. They focused on the big names first. GOTG could wait. They did Cap 1 and 2 first. They did Thor 1 and 2 first. They did Iron Man 1, 2, and 3 first. They did Hulk 1 and 2 first. They did Avengers first. You gotta strike the iron while it's hot as the saying goes. Do the big names first, establish your name and reputation, then you can focus on the less known names.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

Sure, Suicide Squad isn't a bigger name than The Flash and Aquaman. But Suicide Squad has gotten a boost by being in Arrow, so they might think that it's good to do it before The Flash since The Flash has now its own TV-series and they might wanna wait and see how long it's gonna run before they decide if they are gonna do the movie as a follow up to the series or just a stand alone movie that has nothing to do with the TV-series.
Then Aquaman with Jason Momoa? Seriously? Conan anyone??? Needles to say it sucks already. Anybody who knows anything about Aquaman knows that if it's not directed by James Cameron and star Vincent Chase as Aquaman knows that it's gonna suck.
Shazam and Cyborg will most likely be as successful as Green Lantern was.
And the Green Lantern that is coming out in 2020 is gonna be a total reboot and the movie company will pretend that the first one was never made and hope that people has forgotten all about it by 2020 and go and see the new movie that will have a totally new cast as if it was the first Green Lantern movie that has ever been made.
Then Batman and Superman will get their own standalone movies and they will come out either 2018-19 or 2019-2020. Maybe Batman in 2019 and Superman 2020 since they both are gonna be in Justice League Part:1 that comes out in 2017 and maybe in Part:2 as well that comes out in 2019.

Re: Suicide Squad

Tom Hardy, Will Smith, Margot Robbie and Jared Leto are also in various stages of discussions to join the super-villainous movie, which is being written and directed by “Fury” filmmaker David Ayer.

Warner Bros. is courting Leto to play the Joker in the film, Robbie for Harley Quinn and Hardy for Rick Flag, a founding member of the Suicide Squad. As for Smith, it’s uncertain which character he will play, but sources say it’s likely the Flash nemesis Digger Harkness a.k.a. Captain Boomerang.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

Speaking to The New York Daily News, Snyder revealed he’d never even considered bringing Gustin’s Barry Allen into Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice or the other DC movies. “I just don’t think it was a good fit,” he responded. “I’m very strict with this universe and I just don’t see a version where…that [tone is] not our world.” Snyder is referring here to the relatively light and upbeat tone of The CW’s The Flash, in contrast to the darker, grittier, broodier world of Batman v Superman and its related films.

Sources at WB tell me that this is just one part of what's going on behind the scenes at the DC movieverse. Zack Snyder and Geoff Johns were taken aback at critical and audience reaction to Batman v Superman, I'm told, and WB execs have found themselves at odds with Snyder over his vision for Justice League and the DC movieverse going forward. Of course Justice League was scheduled to start shooting mere days after BvS was released, which meant WB couldn't take any definitive action - like removing Snyder or delaying the movie to make changes - without poisoning the box office for BvS. The result? Lots of fights between Snyder and the WB execs, and lots of pressure from Burbank on Snyder, who is shooting in London.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

The studio is declining to elaborate on the cliched “creative differences” joint statement that was issued when the two parted ways. But, according to multiple sources close to the project, the director’s vision for the movie was vastly different from the studio’s view. MacLaren envisioned the DC Comics-based “Wonder Woman” movie as an epic origin tale in the vein of “Braveheart,” whereas Warner wanted a more character-driven story that was less heavy on action.

Quint here again. I reached out to a pretty high level source about this not thinking I'd hear back, but that source did indeed write back saying, I quote, "Rumors are bogus" of a George Miller Green Lantern Corps movie. I was skeptical before and now I flat out think this one was a whiff from the Heroic Hollywood guys. Can't win 'em all, fellas!

They only need to show the "origin" of the Yellow/Red Lantern in flashback scenes. But nothing that would take up serious time in the movie. Jump into the action right away!

I just watched the Green Lantern The Animated Series. Boy was it good! The Red Lanterns just appeared and they start fighting. And later there were short flashback scenes to help you understand their origin but then it doesn't take too much time away. That is what we want. Fight, fight, fight. Action, action, action.

“Wonder Woman,” the comic-book global juggernaut about the do-gooding warrior princess, has lifted spirits around the Warner Bros. lot and reenergized the struggling DC Comics cinematic universe, which many critics and fanboys had written off. “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” and “Suicide Squad” may have grossed a combined $1.6 billion globally, but the consensus was they were dark, dour and creatively inert. “Wonder Woman,” with its message of female empowerment, has been a panacea, earning some of the year’s best reviews and inspiring a wave of internet memes.

“It’s a huge turnaround for [DC],” says Jeff Bock, an analyst with Exhibitor Relations. “There’s been so much hate spewed at them that people were wondering if they had it in them to make a film that people actually liked.”

The success of “Wonder Woman” comes as the movie studio is in the first months of a leadership shakeup that elevated Toby Emmerich to the position of president and chief content officer and led to the ouster of production chief Greg Silverman. As one of his first priorities after taking the job in December, Emmerich has spent much of his time immersing himself in the world of DC Comics, in an effort to help the unit better compete with its highly successful rival, Disney’s Marvel.

His learning curve has been steep.

“I don’t speak comic,” Emmerich acknowledges in his first sit-down interview since assuming his new role, a week after “Wonder Woman” took the box office by storm. “I do feel like I speak motion pictures. I speak for an audience. I look and ask, ‘How does this work for a general audience?’”

The DC team says Emmerich’s lack of comic-book knowledge isn’t an issue.

“He understands that when wea’re talking about the characters, we’re not just talking about what their powers are,” says DC Entertainment president and chief creative officer Geoff Johns. “We’re talking about who they are as people.”

Emmerich may struggle with the difference between the Dark Knight and Darkseid, but comic-book movies aren’t the reason the exec is now leading the studio’s film arm. He established himself as one of the industry’s most widely respected creative executives during an eight-year stint running Warner’s New Line Cinema. There, he primarily churned out modestly budgeted comedies and horror films, such as “We’re the Millers” and “Annabelle,” which often proved enormously profitable. Though New Line made a few pricey films — some of which worked (“San Andreas”), others that didn’t (“Jack the Giant Slayer”) — that wasn’t really Emmerich’s modus operandi. He had deep relationships with the creative community and an ability to rein in costs that made him attractive to corporate higher-ups.

“Toby came into this role having successfully run a movie studio that produced every genre, from billion-dollar franchise titles to microbudget horror films,” Warner Bros. Entertainment chairman and CEO Kevin Tsujihara says. “He’s extremely talented, well-respected and has a vision for Warner Bros. Pictures’ future, as well as a plan on how to execute on that vision.”

Emmerich’s success at finding the next big franchises will determine whether or not his tenure at the studio is a long and happy one. Warner Bros. was once the titan of Hollywood, boasting the likes of “The Lord of the Rings,” “Harry Potter” and “The Dark Knight.” Those series have reached their conclusions, and in the intervening years the studio has struggled to find new ones. The many tens of millions spent and lost by Warner Bros. on “Pan,” “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” and this summer’s “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” show just how difficult it can be to develop fresh hits. In the interim, Disney, with its arsenal of “Star Wars” and “Avengers” adventures, has established itself as the dominant brand in movies.

“Warners has had an uneven record,” says Matthew Harrigan, an analyst with Wunderlich Securities. “Aspirationally, they want to be the envy of all the other studios, but the implementation has been uneven. If you look at ‘Suicide Squad’ or ‘Batman v Superman,’ it’s embarrassing how bad the critical fallout was.”

Sitting in a garden patio at Warner Bros.’ Burbank headquarters and later, after the air grows crisp, in a conference room adorned with posters of studio triumphs such as “Wonder Woman” and blunders like “King Arthur,” Emmerich is eager to give the credit for the latest windfall to Johns and Jon Berg, the executives who oversee the comic-book films. He stresses that the success of “Wonder Woman” is more their doing, saying the film was deep into post-production when he took over at the studio. He believes the movie feels fresh because the “heart and humor” that director Patty Jenkins injected into the picture was a break from the downbeat superhero films that have been hitting multiplexes. “The zeitgeist of the culture, in America and many parts of the world, were ready to embrace a female superhero,” Emmerich says.

It’s too soon to credit “Wonder Woman” with shattering Hollywood’s glass ceiling for female directors, but the film did prove that there is an appetite for action films about strong women.

“I know that our competitors are going to look at the success of this movie,” he says. “People love to call Hollywood lemmings, and it’s not always unfair. I’m sure that plenty of producers and writers and studio executives are asking, ‘What the heck happened with “Wonder Woman,” and how do we get in on that action?’”

In the meantime, DC is plunging ahead with two more female-focused projects, “Gotham City Sirens,” in which Margot Robbie will reprise her “Suicide Squad” role as the demented Harley Quinn, and Joss Whedon’s “Batgirl,” which the “Avengers” writer and director urged the studio to make. There will also be more Diana Prince. Emmerich says that Jenkins is already working on a “Wonder Woman” sequel. It won’t take place in World War I, as the first film did, but it will also likely be set in the past.

“It will take place somewhere between 1917 and 2017,” Emmerich says coyly.

He’s also thinking of ways that DC can differentiate itself from Marvel projects, which tend to be family-friendly. Emmerich says he admires violent, irreverent and very adult comic-book movies such as “Logan” and “Deadpool.”

“I would be surprised if we didn’t at some point make an R-rated DC movie,” says Emmerich.

Emmerich, who prefers cardigans to power suits, isn’t the typical Hollywood executive. Perhaps it’s his upbringing: His father, Andre Emmerich, was an influential art dealer; his mother, Constance Marantz, is a concert pianist; and brother Noah has a key role as an FBI agent on “The Americans.” Emmerich comes off as more cerebral and composed than the typically flashy and hard-charging studio chief. He’s devoted to his wife and two children and tries to cook dinner and breakfast for the family on the weekends.

“Aquaman” and “The Conjuring” director James Wan says Emmerich preaches the gospel of self-improvement to friends. He convinced the filmmaker that taking cold showers has salutary benefits.

“It’s easier to partake of in the summer than the winter, but it does pep me up and keeps me going through the day,” Wan says.

Unlike other Hollywood players, Emmerich speaks at a lower decibel level, referencing film classes he took as a student at Wesleyan University, where he was a contemporary of Whedon and Michael Bay.

“He’s a strong presence,” says producer Chris Bender, who has worked with Emmerich on the likes of “We’re the Millers” and “Vacation.” “We’ve been in the trenches many times. Sometimes you’re in the test-screening phase and your movie’s getting a good score or a bad score, but he’s always had a nice, calming effect even when the situation’s tough.”

To unwind, Emmerich reads, meditates, does yoga and Pilates and plays the occasional game of tennis. He used to ride a motorcycle (but admits he’s not doing that as much these days) and he’s an amateur photographer (his first job was taking head shots of actors and musicians).

Though he’s kept a low profile since taking the job at Warner, he’s already making a mark on operations. He’s promoted Courtenay Valenti, a studio veteran, to head production and development, and he brought back Kevin McCormick, a former top Warner executive, to serve as exec VP of production and as a senior adviser. By the fall, Emmerich wants to move the Warner Bros. animation division and DC Comics into a central location with the rest of the production team.

“Culture’s influenced a lot by architecture and the space that you’re in — how you physically bump into each other,” he says. “I like conversations a lot more than meetings. The closer people are and the more ebb and flow that there is, I think the better it is.”

DC may be commanding the bulk of his attention, but Emmerich is also looking beyond the Justice League. He’s confident in “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,” the “Harry Potter” spinoff that made $814 million globally last year, anticipates four more “wizarding” films and believes that the series will build a bigger audience as it continues. He’s also bullish on “Jungle Book,” a long-gestating motion-capture version of the Rudyard Kipling stories that’s being directed by Andy Serkis, the actor behind Gollum in “LOTR.” Many in Hollywood have questioned the wisdom of moving forward with the film given Disney’s adaptation of the same material became a nearly $1 billion worldwide hit in 2016, but Emmerich says that Serkis’ vision is unique.

“I’m very curious how the world embraces it,” he says. “It is based on the same source material that the Disney movie is based on, but man, is it a different interpretation. If Rudyard Kipling saw this movie, he would more readily recognize it as an adaptation of his book.”

These days, most studios are making fewer films but placing bigger bets on movies about costumed vigilantes or big-screen versions of toy lines. Despite the production slowdown among its competitors, Warner intends to release a wide array of films. The plan is for the studio to back 18 to 22 titles a year, roughly double what Disney produces. Despite being burned on the likes of “King Arthur,” Emmerich believes that Warners must continue to be aggressive and take chances, knowing that big swings can sometimes lead to big misses. He’s also wary of prizing well-known brands above compelling stories.

“There are things that everybody’s heard of, like Kleenex tissues,” says Emmerich. “Everyone knows what it is, but I’m not looking to make the Kleenex movie. Just because they’ve heard of it doesn’t make it a good idea.”

Re: Flashpoint

The announcement that Warner Bros' solo Flash movie will, apparently, be called Flashpoint (or perhaps Flash: Flashpoint, it's unclear) during the studio's San Diego Comic-Con presentation Saturday morning was a surprise on multiple fronts. For one thing, just the fact that the movie isn't called The Flash might seem unusual, until you remember that it's in the WB's best interests to find some way of differentiating the movie from the TV show of the same name (despite the fact that both feature versions of the same character).

However, Flashpoint isn't a title with no resonance for the Flash as a character; it's the name of a five-issue 2011 comic book series that was later adapted (in concept only) as the plot engine for the first half of the third season of the CW series — the idea that DC's Fastest Man Alive would use his powers to go back in time to save the life of his mother, only to wreck the timeline as a result.

In the TV version of the plot, things were (mostly) returned to normal within an hour, albeit with specific aftershocks that drove future episodes. In the comic book story, however — written by Geoff Johns, who not coincidentally is now in charge of DC's movie output — things are far more complicated: The "Flashpoint" universe rewrites the larger DC Universe in a way that creates alternate versions of Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Superman and Green Lantern…all of whom exist within the DC movieverse, and are primed for an alternate take that could put a spotlight on the (unchanged) Flash in a way that few other storylines could follow.

Such a movie wouldn't just allow for actors like Jason Momoa and Gal Gadot to play against their established DC roles (The Flashpoint Wonder Woman and Aquaman are essentially at war with humanity in their own ways, and far more violent characters), if it followed the course of the comic storyline, it would allow Jeffrey Dean Morgan to return as Bruce Wayne's father, Thomas — a character who, in Flashpoint's timeline, becomes the Batman when his son is murdered by a mugger in an alleyway.

Some might argue that the concept of Flashpoint comes a little too early in the DC Extended Universe timeline — as one Twitter user snarked, don't you have to actually have a universe before you rewrite it? — but it offers multiple benefits for filmmakers, and the larger DC franchise, if they chose to embrace it: a movie filled with Easter Eggs, in-jokes and hints of things that might come for the hard-core DC faithful; a change for the Flash to get into the spotlight, removed from his Justice League teammates that feels organic to the story and doesn't have audiences asking why Wonder Woman or Batman don't help out every couple of minutes, and — in case there's any reason to do such a thing — an explanation for any cast changes, continuity rewrites or repositioning of the larger universe moving forward, courtesy of literally rewriting history.

Flash Point could be the answer to all of Warner Bros' problems with the larger DC cinematic universe…if it's looking for one.

Wonder Woman is holding better than any superhero film in more than 15 years at the North American box office. It has grossed more than $389 million at the domestic box office to date and passed Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 over the weekend.

So far, Wonder Woman 2 is the only release slated for Dec. 13, 2019. The date announcement comes a week after Warners set dates for a number of mystery films, including an untitled DC movie for Feb. 14, 2020.

Wonder Woman 2 joins Justice League and Aquaman (Dec. 21, 2018) as the only DC films with release dates. But over the weekend at San Diego Comic-Con, Warner Bros. teased its upcoming slate with logos for films including Shazam! (which will be its next film to shoot), Flash movie Flashpoint, The Batman, Batgirl, Justice League Dark, Green Lantern Corps and Suicide Squad 2.

Re: The Flash and Green Lantern 2

Warner Bros. is now developing filmmaker-driven projects that won't be connected to its larger shared universe, something that's been happening in the comics for decades.

While everyone — myself included — was distracted by the thought of a Joker origin movie, there was another piece of news in Tuesday's story that Todd Phillips is working on a movie about the Batman villain. Warner Bros. is creating a new label for movies featuring DC characters outside of its main shared universe.

The notion of a boutique DC films imprint that allows filmmakers to play with characters from the comic publisher without having to deal with the continuity (or cast) of other movies is certainly something that fits in with the history of the company, which has told stories outside of its central timeline for decades under a variety of conceits and publishing initiatives. How else to explain stories from the 1950s where Superman and Lois Lane were a married couple, from the 1970s where Superman and Batman's teenage sons tried — and, for the most part, failed — to be rebellious, or from the 1990s, where irresponsible superheroes almost caused the end of the world? (Well, okay, the Lois and Superman one was really just a dream; it'd happen for real in 1996, of course.)

Those comic book stories — and countless other "imaginary tales," Elseworld stories or whatever other branding they wore at the time — demonstrate the value in the idea of pulling characters outside the larger shared universe and giving them a chance to exist independently, following a particular artistic vision and being allowed the closure that would otherwise be denied them. As a concept in and of itself, there's a lot of potential in giving creators the chance to create their "own" versions of iconic characters and taking it as far as they want, as the ongoing success of Frank Miller's 1986 The Dark Knight Returns bears out.

That said, there's no denying that such a thing could be confusing to the audience as it's being rolled out. How can Warners correctly delineate which movies are part of the Justice League shared universe, and which ones aren't, to a potential market who isn't following online chatter about upcoming releases? Does such a thing even matter, or will viewers just think, "Oh, it's a different guy playing the Joker this time, that's cool"?

It could be argued that this confusion over what does and doesn't "count" as part of canon is in keeping with DC tradition. Unlike Marvel, which has made such an effort to tell audiences that everything happening on a screen is happening in the same fictional universe that it adopted the phrase "It's all connected" as a tagline, DC's onscreen efforts have been far more diffuse. Sure, Arrow, The Flash, Legends of Tomorrow and Supergirl all cross over, but Gotham and other television shows are entirely disconnected. And the current Warner Bros. big-screen efforts are disconnected from the TV shows (whereas Marvel shows like Agents of SHIELD and Daredevil take place in the same universe as the movies). The Flash played by TV's Grant Gustin is a separate, but equal, version of the character as played by the film's Ezra Miller, just as Tyler Hoechlin's Superman isn't Henry Cavill's, and audiences seem to be able to keep that straight in their heads easily enough.

Perhaps that's because DC's comic book mythology has long played with the concept of multiple variations on the same character co-existing alongside each other. Justice League of America No. 21 — published in 1963, just seven years after editor Julius Schwartz reused the name and gimmick of 1940s hero the Flash for a new character — introduced the idea of a multiverse filled with alternate, parallel worlds, allowing for endless variations on an idea to be published depending on creator whims.

That such an idea would end up, decades later, so confusing for new readers — Which Earth did each comic take place on? What happened when creators forgot and misidentified worlds? — that an entirely separate comic would have to be created to simplify matters couldn't have been foreseen at the time, but should, perhaps, serve as a warning to Warner Bros. moving forward. The title of that comic, in fact, could be considered a sign of things to come if quality control and strong oversight aren't exercised on future movie projects, both inside and outside this new creator-led imprint: Crisis on Infinite Earths. Or, at least, "Crisis in multiple multiplexes."

EXCLUSIVE: It’s been over two months since Wonder Woman opened to a staggering $103.2M and went on to gross close to $800M worldwide for Warner Bros. (with Japan yet to bow). The movie, directed by Patty Jenkins, not only re-invigorated DC movies and the studio itself, but became a symbol of strength for women across the country. Now Jenkins is returning to the director’s chair to helm the second film in the franchise that she was so instrumental in starting.

Last month at Comic-Con, the studio confirmed both a sequel with Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot and a release date of Dec. 13, 2019. However, curiously, there was no deal with Jenkins. Why the delay? Because Jenkins — who was lauded repeatedly during the Women in Film Crystal Awards this year by several of its nominees — expects to be paid substantially more and the same as a male director would receive after such a box office coup. That desire was seconds away from becoming a reality on Thursday evening as a deal was being finalized which would elevate her as the highest-paid female director in town.

And why not? Wonder Woman shattered several glass ceilings at the box office, including the best opening ever for a title by a female director and the best global haul for a live-action film directed by a woman as well as the third-highest grossing film in Warner Bros.’ history (behind only Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight series).

Although no payday was revealed, we understand that her payday and deal is in line with any other director who has performed at this level. A studio source said they were “confident the deal will be reached soon.”

Typically, according to sources, a frosh director on a comic book movie gets $1.5M to $3M, while a director in the realm of Zack Snyder (who is helming DC’s Justice League) received $10M against 10% cash break even for his second DC film Man of Steel. (That’s usually paid out as 20% during pre-production, 60% during production, 10% during post and 10% following).

Wonder Woman continues to show that there’s a big demand and big business for female-led tentpoles after Star Wars Force Awakes, Rogue One, and The Hunger Games trilogy.

Jenkins burst on the scene with the critically acclaimed indie film Monster in 2003 — she wrote and directed while Charlize Theron won Best Actress — then directed a number of TV episodes for such shows as Entourage and The Killing before she was hired on for Wonder Woman. She handled the female super-hero film with a deft hand. Wonder Woman will go over $800M worldwide soon as it opens in Japan on Aug. 25.